On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 3:27 PM Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > 0001 below does this. I found a couple of places that could use > forfive(), as well. I think this is a clear legibility and > error-proofing win, and we should just push it.
It sounds like some of these places might need a bigger restructuring - i.e. to iterate over a list/vector of structs with 5 members instead of iterating over five lists in parallel. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
